Inclusive Branding Strategies for Domestic Violence Agencies: Embracing Opportunities to Reach and Better Serve Male-Identified Survivors.

Successful strategies for branding that are inclusive of male-identified survivors were identified in this qualitative study through semi-structured interviews with leaders from six domestic violence agencies across the United States: four represented traditional domestic violence agencies and two represented specialized agencies with expertise in providing services to nontraditional survivors. The strategic implementation of (a) inclusive language, (b) visual diversity, (c) community outreach, and (d) communication channels emerged as successful strategies in branding in an inclusive way for male-identified survivors. The implementation of these successful strategies provides the opportunity for domestic violence agencies to create an inclusive environment for male-identified survivors and would contribute to a paradigm shift in how domestic violence is viewed.

When a Spoonful of Fallacies Helps the Sweetener Go Down: The Corn Refiner Association's Use of Straw-Person Arguments in Health Debates Surrounding High-Fructose Corn Syrup.

The American public is increasingly concerned about risks associated with food additives like high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). To promote its product as safe, the Corn Refiners Association (CRA) employed two forms of straw-person arguments. First, the CRA opportunistically misrepresented HFCS opposition as inept. Second, the CRA strategically chose to refute claims that were easier to defeat while remaining ambiguous about more complex points of contention. We argue that CRA's discursive contributions represented unreasonable yet sustainable use of straw-person arguments in debates surrounding health and risk.

A "naturally sweet" definition: an analysis of the sugar association's definition of the natural as a terministic screen.

The political nature of sugar as a cultural commodity can be traced back for centuries. While the issues surrounding sugar consumption have changed, power struggles still exist as stakeholders struggle to identify, make sense of, and manage the relationship between sugar and obesity. I explore the rhetorical contributions of the Sugar Association to public understandings of sweeteners. Specifically, I argue that the Sugar Association positioned sugar as the best choice for consumers by positioning their sweetener within a definition of the natural that the organization constructs. I draw on Burke's (1966) notion of terministic screens as a theoretical framework through which sugar was positioned as the best sweetener option and HFCS and artificial sweeteners were isolated as unnatural and, therefore, unwise choices for consumers. Then, I argue that the association's definition of "the natural" was strategically ambiguous, serving to distinguish sugar from other sweeteners. I conclude by evaluating the soundness and sustainability of the association's discursive contributions to public understandings of health and its implications for key stakeholders in the sweetener community.

"Healthy" discussions about risk: The Corn Refiners Association's strategic negotiation of authority in the debate over high fructose corn syrup.

Many foods and eating practices have been framed as risky by risk societies. Recently, high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has become a highly scrutinized food additive. Informed by a social construction of risk framework, I analyze the discursive contributions of the Corn Refiners Association, a trade association, to public negotiations of HFCS risks. I describe how the association's Sweet Surprise campaign advertisements rely on a deficit model to shape understandings of who should participate in conversations about HFCS. I conclude by exploring the practical implications of this analysis, particularly how trade associations can negotiate tensions between promoting health and serving commercial interests, and how these decisions contribute to understandings of the public's role in risk negotiation.